Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 70 (some duplicates have been removed)
or professional service use to locate there given the lack of visibility from the street. * the second floor of the property consists of [speaker not understood] offices of mental health providers. given that any use on the first floor would have to be compatible with the existing use, it seemed a good use for the ground floor would be additional offices for medical health providers. our office contacted the planning department and confirmed that the only way to remedy the situation, one that we felt worthy of remedying was through legislation. legislation was obviously needed in this case due to the fact that new medical service uses are prohibited in the sacramento street ncd which runs from lion's street to spruce street on sacramento. when drafting legislation we wanted to make sure that we respected the concerns that created the prohibition in the first place. in 1987 when these controls were in place there were concerns that medical service uses were displacing neighborhood service -- neighborhood serving businesses and residential units. i really should not have ran up those stairs. e
for conditional use authorization is being proposed for continuance to february 28th, 2013. i have no other items proposed for continuance and i have no speaker cards. >> is there any public comment on the one item proposed for continuance? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners? commissioner sugaya. >> move to continue item number 1 to february 28th. >> second. >> on that motion to continue 795 folsom to february 28th, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? excuse me, commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> here -- i mean, yes, aye. [laughter] >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> and commission president fong? >> aye. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to 0 and placed you under your consent calendar. all matters listed hereunder constitute a consent calendar, are considered to be routine by the planning commission, and will be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission, the public, or staff so requests
, could staff look into that a little bit and give it -- maybe just give us a short, like a memo or something on what's going on with that. given that other entertainment seems to have caused some issues. and then under the building inspection, there was discussion and possible action -- i'm just reading this -- on a proposed ordinance amending the building code to establish mandatory seismic retrofit for wood frame buildings of three or more stories and containing five or more dwellings. could we also get some information -- okay, all right. >> in fact, on your advance calendar as a future presentation -- >> all right, okay, great. thank you. >> commissioner borden. >> yes, i would also -- i also got to know lou spadia. i went to the chamber in his years he would actually still come in. it was always such a delightful person to have around. people don't know what the bay area sports all of fame is, when you're in the united terminal at san francisco international airport, it has the plaques of the athletes. it's a great idea and a way to make our airport terminal very local and
>> that was kind of my understanding, is our conditional use is conditioned on the formation and approval of the sud, but that's understood we can take that action and encourage the board of supervisors to establish the sud that would allow this to happen. and i remember that happening on quite a few projects. i can't bring them up line and verse, it's happened. perhaps zoning administrator sanchez can -- >> yes, recently in december with the adoption of the western soma plan, the item immediately after that was an approval of a project under the western soma plan. the western soma plan still hasn't been to the land use committee, but that would probably not become adopted and effective until april or may. and, so, the approval that this commission gave was contingent upon the successful adoption of those rezoning efforts. so, this is something that this commission has done numerous times. there are many, many examples of this. >> thank you. and finally, as to the approvals themselves that are before us, i think they seem to be fairly formulated for the project owner who wou
the machines, using the machines for his future projects or reselling them on the open market. >> so, there is a salvage value -- >> owe yes. these machines -- the machines that will be used to build the central subway are essentially new machines. * oh, these machines have a fairly, very -- they can be reused and refurbished and they're used throughout the world in other projects that would use that same diameter. >> great. the one final question while i have you here, the north beach station option is clearly not before us today. but my understanding is nothing we're doing here would preclude that possibility. in other words, it actually would make it possible to have a north beach station by continuing the tunnel to north beach and providing a site where possibly a future station pending environmental review could be built? >> that's correct. we're not doing anything that would preclude a north beach station or make it more difficult to construct in the future. >> thank you very much. i appreciate it. well, a few comments along those lines. i'm just going to make -- sir, thanks f
more of an argument for both of them, but i don't think the other one will be for us if this passes. since most of their business is delivery, if you have them closer to each other, you can have drivers driving less distance, burning up less gas and generally be a little bit more favorable to the environment, if you are not going further distances to deliver pizza. also, it is nice to have something that is walkable in a neighborhood. a lot of times you come home and want to get a quick bite and you don't want to have to move your car again or take a bus to get something to eat. you just want to get some food and go home and there are quite a few residences in this area. a lot of parking lot apartment buildings and condos and they mentioned they are getting a higher percentage of walkout traffic in addition to just delivery. it's replacing an existing eating and drinking establishment. that the present owner testified that his price point was too high to be successful. and you know, it just wasn't going to work. so either have a vacant place or you will have this. and finally, lo
makes it impossible for the people to use that area because they can't sit down there or use the space if it is not a flat area. number two, it is going to attract a lot of newspapers and other flying objects that will fly around and you will have one employee spending most of their time picking the junk off of those things, i think that a flatter type of foliage would be practical and if you are going to have a few taller trees and paik them some of it less apt to catch garbage and also maybe make them month minimal and there will more space and light. because you are trying to capture as much light as you can. the same token, i think that there is a rendering of the space between floors, where you have some planters and it looked kind of wild grass coming out of there, again a little tall. you might be better be having more colorful like annuals these are just minor points and i think that it will lighten it up a little as is typically the case in many areas, we don't have as many in san francisco, we we have planter boxes outside of window and they are colorful in cities a
to us to see and we have done that in the past where the director shared with us the new designs and plans, and i think that it is innovative and the land dedication and the on site affordable and having a former board member and aware of the challenges that that organization has faced with the brick and mortar space and hope that it be a model. some of those merchants could actually live in that area. i am familiar with the concourse and i am doing a large gala, i was sad when we picked the space we didn't know what it was going to be demolished and i understand the point to that. not to say that we would not have used the concourse, but that could be a place that we could use it in the future, it is unfortunate that was a place to know if they were selecting that site this year or last year and this could be the final year and it is regrettable. it is a very large, kind of warehouse spait and it is not worth preserving but it is one of those spaces of the type and size in the city. but it is primarily used for a lot of big events because there are not a lot of big spaces for th
that this is a very good project and i think that it is exactly what we need one speaker spoke about mixed use and i think that is clearly, there is going to be people, more people living here, the people who will not only work here, but also will take care of their nighttime activities and make it a much more vibrant area of the city. and then someone else spoke about the entitlement for a project that may be sold in the future. and the entitlement that goes with the project if we think that it is the proper project then we should entitle it and regardless if it is sold to another entity, that entity is bound by our conditional use or in this case, it is not a 309, i think that it is a 323 approval, i forget the exact number. but the same rules apply. so those are my feelings, i think that it is real good, and i would like to see a little bit of work on the design and trying to make sure that it is as contextal as possible. particularly with the rich buildings of show place square. >> mr. moore? >> i want to speak to both projects because i believe that it is the transformational power that the con
know, try to achieve the greatest number of units because that makes the greatest sense for us in terms of the economy of scale in terms of the particular development and so our goal will be to try to achieve the limit that you are authorizing at 150 for the site. and on that particular site. and that will be part of the request for proposals. and the i think that the only question, is really the question of timing in terms of the pipeline and you know all of the competing needs from on the housing trust fund but they are clearly very interested in this neighborhood. we don't have affordable housing in this immediate neighborhood now. we think that affordable housing is a public benefit that should be shared with all neighborhoods of san francisco and so we look forward to developing it on the site. >> thank you for that comment, as far as the architecture goes, i think that the skillfulness on how both projects are presented to including the detail and does not really require anything in common, the one that i think that i hope and if you want to ask to please come to the podium, norma
. but it is not an eating establishment. we approved an accessory use to a bookstore with limited seating. how the staff can find that this place is not in violation is beyond me. all you have to do is look at the repairs packet and the photos. there is not one book in the entire store at least in this photo. there are on the first floor five tables when the conditional use says two. it's limited to 15 seats; there are more seats than 15. how the staff does not consider this is in violation is beyond me. i cannot see how we can consider this without them first issued an nov and go through the process. also the north beach neighborhood commercial district, section 7221 of the code specifically says, special controls are necessary because in over concentration a food service establishments limits retail sales and personal services in an area that needs them to thrive the neighborhood. needs to maintain neighborhood retail sales and personal services to maintain residential livability. additional eating and drinking establishments are prohibited in spaces occupied by neighborhood services involved in
believe that we are rushing this at a rate that does not give us the ability to support. >> commissioner borden. >> i feel quite a bit differently. you know, we have -- the fundamental difference in this project and the project we saw a couple years ago was full demolition of the older building, which was pretty much been kind of a shed standing for quite sometime versus a total demolition. i mean, i always argue about i'm not always confused about de facto or actual demolition. but in all intents and purposes, the previous project we approved didn't even look like the same project although it was not considered a total demolition. now we have a total demolition and we basically have fundamentally the same project before us. the issues, we may have -- we have drawings in front of us and maybe they're not color rendering. but substantially everything about this project, the size and the scope, the only difference that we talked about is the size of the use for the restaurant there being whether or not it was commercial use, other commercial use incorporated. but i haven't actually heard a
recommends that you direct us to come back with separate legislation that would do two things. one, add two additional parcel that would be up zoned to 65 feet in a manner consistent with the market octavia plan. there are two additional corner parcels there that are not historic resources that we believe could be 65 feet. and then the second is to correct what we believe is an error within the nct whether it be 7 parcels that has a 60, 65 foot height designation and two that have a 50-55 foot height legislation. and that would be separate legislation initiated by you. >> great. well, if it's appropriate, i'd like to make a motion for approval. and i would just add the following things that i'd alluded to those in my conversation, that we would allow the provision for off-site full-service food service at other nc districts throughout the city that apply to the criteria here. and then we would remove the sunseting * for this specific instance here that was i believe in the original legislation. and the technical changes that ms. hayward could allude to later. and then the height changes fo
rhode island street, request for conditional use authorization. i believe commissioner moore is requesting that it be pulled off. >> [inaudible]. >> we'll place that first item under the regular calendar. moving on, commissioners, commissioners questions and matters, item 3, consideration of adoption draft minutes for january 31st, 2013. >> is there any public comment on the draft minutes? seeing none, commissioners? commissioner borden. >> approve draft minutes november -- excuse me, from january 31st. >> second. >> on the motion to adopt minutes for january 31st, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? he aye. >> and commission president fong? >> aye. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to 0 and places you under item 4, commission questions and comments. >> commissioner antonini. >> thank you. a couple of things, i've been hearing these reports in the news about an impending demolition of candlestick park. about a year from now, if in fact t
for people is inside or outside the room? >>> outside. the use of the atm is done in the vestibule itself. >> but it faces kind of sideways, not toward the street? >>> exactly. >> okay. it sounds like it helps at least with the signage not facing the street. and i think you're hearing that people don't want the signage necessarily of the atm [speaker not understood]. >> yes, i understand there is concern about the number of signs we put on the buildings. the amount of blue illumination. i will certainly take that strongly into account when we design the signage package of the building. * >> commissioner antonini. >> yes, mr. sanchez, i think i've seen that decision from '54 many times, justification for discretionary review. it goes on to say it is a very sensitive discretion that has to be used with extreme caution, restraint. but in any case, the much larger issue in regards to the sign and color issue is design in general. you go to a lot of places in some communities, even other fairly large cities, and the formula retail establishment, banks and others, are very tastefully done in th
will need to look at that increase in projected revenue to help us get to the needed levels. the increases that we are looking at are largely associated with the labor and negotiations that took place last year and the contracts that are in place for the next couple of years. so those are going to increase our salary and fringe benefit cost to a certain degree and we know last year at this time we discussed reducing the city order and we brought it down to $180,000 to $130,000 and we talked about reducing it further going forward to $120,000. at this point i am not going to recommend that we any lower than we are now. we had a work order with the city attorney for the last five years and the utilization has fluctuated over the last five years and that has depended on a lot of factors and it has to do with the caseload and the volume of the cases and the length of board meetings and the hours that the city attorney has to sit with us and the complexity and uniqueness of the cases and the number of new board members that come on and increase of on boarding those members and also changes in t
amendment, height reclassification and conditional use authorization. * >> good afternoon, president fong, members of the commission, director lam, administrator sanchez. my name is ed reiskin. i'm the director of transportation here in san francisco. i'm happy to be here and grateful for the opportunity to present on this item. for the past two months san francisco mta has been working closely with the community under the leadership of mayor lee and board president and district 3 supervisor david chiu to address some community concerns that have been raised about the central subway project as it relates to the north beach neighborhood. i want to thank the mayor and supervisor chiu for their leadership in this. the supervisor may be joining later, but i want to acknowledge justin true from his office who is here to answer any questions you might have. the item before you today, upon approval, will enable this project to move forward in a way that addresses the community concerns, but also allows the project which will serve the larger san francisco community to advance as it's currently s
think it really is a fine, welcoming place. so, i'm supportive of allowing them to have accessory use across the street. staff recommended it be city-wide. i don't think this is the appropriate time to go city-wide. i think that that requires some discussion across the city, what this might mean for other neighborhoods. but i actually don't think this is a top priority for city-wide discussion, depending on what sort of comes up in other neighborhoods. i think what i've seen we've done is make it apply to the entire -- in this case would be the upper market nct, if that portion passes. i refer to actually the sacramento street item that we had today where we change the use for medical street. and also the third floor, what was it, personal service that we made recently on valencia street. so, maybe i can ask the supervisor if he wanted to speak to that at all, the idea of making it available to the entire upper market nct. >>> thank you, commissioners. i would be very open to legislation to change the nct to allow for off-site. i do believe that would probably trigger city-wide discus
want to confirm something and clarify something. i think with this language, we started using light green and dark green here. i do not think we're using the same definition that marin uses. we're using -- we're talking about 100% renewable in both the dark green and the light green option. correct? it's just the rec mix that will differentiate the light versus the dark. * >> so, correct. what we've presented were a series of 100% renewable portfolio. >> correct. >> and i think folks fell into the language of how do you describe the sort of premiumness of the green products that makeup that 100%. in order to express the differentiation between a heavily bucket 3 100% renewable program versus a less, a 5% bucket 3 versus an 85% bucket 3. >> which is different from marin, correct? >> very different from marin. >> i agree with the public commenters who said the definition of light and dark green is different than how it's being used here today. >> i don't know if we need different language or what we need to do, but i think that's important to clarify. * >> we need different language.
a system where we had a creating and nonconformity here that seemed a little awkward to us when the land use itself didn't seem to be -- have a negative impact. >> i personally could go either way. i know the concern particularly in the area of food trucks. people could turn their kitchens into service or food trucks. they may already do that. i don't know what the implications are. i guess the challenge with that -- i mean. i personally think it sounds fine. at a minimum if there were a pass for legalization of off-site kitchens, you could have a sense of the scope of the issue before them going to the next step. that might be kind of an interim thought. >> commissioner hillis. >> so, i'm also supportive of the legislation. i think probably if we use the words unique, funky and [speaker not understood], they're all probably in violation of the planning code. if we looked around. [laughter] >> we could use that adjective unique funky, in violation of the planning code. it's amazing cafe floor is only 900 square feet when you walk by. it feels bigger. there is a lot happening obviously. i
it's a nonconforming use and, therefore, it is what it is. but -- and it's attached to -- i suppose it doesn't have to be attached to cafe floor. it could be an off-site kitchen for another restaurant, i assume. so, it could -- someone else could utilize it. as long as it didn't change use, it can stay where it is. but if it did, then the whole thing goes away. that said, i think there appears to be full support for the staff looking at expanding the legislation to include what commissioner wu just spoke about. but i'm uncomfortable in doing that because this has not been vetted before anyone and the community and the merchants associations and everyone else were looking at a specific application for cafe floor. but i think there's another discussion that needs to be had with the community groups about expanding it all over the upper market area. and for us to take a vote on that i don't think is appropriate. >> so, are you, commissioner sugaya, removing that portion of your -- your portion of the motion? >> no. i'm saying staff should go ahead with that. and it would go through the
beach. when you consider the use of this building for an extraction site it should be denied. i think it is an expensive project. it is disruptive. there are a lot better alternatives. thank you for your time. >>: and if further general public comment? seeing none general public comment is closed. >>: this will place you under your regular calendar. items 10 a-c have been continued to feb. 14. items 4 and 5 have been pulled. >>: request from commissioner antonini. >> commissioner antonini: i ask for a recusal from 3110 octavia. my dentist's office is within 500 feet. i ask for recusal. >>: move to recluse commissioner antonini. >>: second. >> commissioner borden: aye >> commissioner moore: aye >> commissioner sugaya: aye >> president wu: aye. >>: so moved. >>: michelle- planning staff. 3110 octavia st., request by at&t to install fiber wire. the mail notice calls it as a northeast corner. the general language has been updated. proposed facility consits up to nine antennas. staff has received no public comment and staff is recommending approval with conditions. i am available for q
at the corner of 16th and kansas streets are the only two formula retail uses. by the whole foods located at the southwest corner of 17th and rhode island street is [speaker not understood], falls within the mur zoning district where formula retail uses are principally permitted. the sbaeerctiontionv at kansas and 16th street is the only other financial service or bank formula retail or otherwise located within this contiguous umu zoning district. and while the umu zoning district encourages wide uses, residential, retail offices and [speaker not understood], currently located within this contiguous umu district. regarding public comment, to date the department has received no public comment on this project. in order for the project to move forward, the planning commission must grant conditional use authorization to allow a new formula retail use within this umu zoning district. the department believes this is a necessary and desirable project because no overconcentration of formula retail uses exist within the contiguous umu zoning district because the contiguous umu zoning district curr
i think both of us really believe the death penalty is wrong, and is flawed for many reasons. the list is as long as my arm -- about several others. we feel this is important for both of us, personally, to participate in the debate of this issue in a way that we can help people frame it for a conversation. -- i like to take roll. >> commissioner antonini: here >> commissioner hillis: here >> commissioner sugaya: here >> commissioner moore: here. >> commissioner borden: here. >>: item 1, 2013.0029x, at 222 2nd street, request for determination of compliance, request for continuance. we have received late request for continued items 10 a, b & c. for case -- the requested data continuances to february 14. i have no other items. i have no speaker cards for matters propose for continuance. i do have speaker card for items on 1741 powell. >> president fong: public comments on items proposed for continuance. >>: good afternoon president fong, commissioners. we did make this request for continuance as a sponsor of this special district use legislation. very briefly i did want to sta
the institutions that have served us so well over the last half century. they are dramatically changing. you see it certainly in media. you've seen it in the financial service industry now increasingly serving the music industry. and you see it in city government. you are a big participant in that dramatic evolution or what i would argue, the dramatic punctuation point in terms of the world we live in. i don't think it's cyclical. i think something dramatic is taking shape here as it relates to particularly the impact of technology is having on the world we're living in. we're living in a fish bowl. the whole idea of holding back information and keeping that information for those [speaker not understood] those in power, those days are over. age of amateurs, big is getting small, small is getting big. this democracy of voices, new contours of a new society, truly i think is being shaped. and, so, you are a big part of that. and i hope the spirit of engagement, civil grand jurors across the state, is respected in that light. as a supervisor, i was a big champion of you. as a marry was a little mor
is there is a demand by many businesses for the broader floor plates and it allows tech uses and other uses that need this kind of configuration to come to satisfy. and i know of another situation that's similar to this at the present time uop [speaker not understood] dental school is renovating a building that already has these broad plates on 5th street near mission. and i was a graduate of the earlier facility and i can speak to the difficulty that facility has in its present location because of the narrowness. so, it's not just tech, but other uses. it's important that we get broad floor plates. however, this has to be correct and i think the things they've done in terms of tower separation, bulk, are very much in keeping with the code. as was pointed out by mr. guy, because of the tdr sold by 6 20, 63 1 howard, there never will be another tower that they have to separate themselves from because even if that building were to be destroyed in a fire or some other manner, it could never be built to more of a height than it's at now because they've already sold their tdrs. and then the bulk, there ar
a future of a north beach station. that's not what's before us. but this project allows that as a realistic possibility. and one of my oppositions or my questioning of the central subway when it first came forward was ending the subway in chinatown. i know that was what was funded and that was what was analyzed and that's what it had to be. but i was really happy to hear even in those days that the extension of the tunnel was proposed to go into north beach and that's, you know, makes a lot of sense. and i've heard that it can be done. the other issue that's been brought up is the height of the new structure which is exactly the same as the height of the existing structure. if you're happy with the height of the existing structure, then i don't really know why someone would object to the very same building at the same height and whether we have to go through the same mechanics again to approve the same thing. and that's maybe one reason why it takes so long to do anything in san francisco, because we like to do it 10 times before we approve it. but it makes sense you're building essentially
used an existing position and temporarily converted it but property ject manager is on board so we are adding a position in to put the project manager in. >> in the $250 million request if that does not come to fruition. >> we will just note it, it does not impact the budget because the money is already appropriate ated it is really more informational. >> right. >> if that number is not actually inside of the budget. because we don't, it is already created. >> if the 0.05 fte that was on like the community initiated, so 0.05. that was that is going up 0.15. >> it is going up to 0.15 and we reallocated it from another line item in the historic preservation. >> what 0.05 mean, you could be divided on the way to work? >> just kidding. >> but, maybe, you know, i don't know if the preservation commission wants more that may be something that if they did not like the $250,000 for the secretary of interior standards perhaps you could ask them for more money for that use >> they have been reporting the response time but they asked us to kind of up our part of it. >> okay. >> yeah, but you
read as different buildings as you move north and south along owens street. * so, you have a use of colors, a use of different materials, some being more glassy, some being a more punched dynamic. and with that you get a sense, even though there is a pattern to the site, they each have their own character ask identity. and i'll just take you around as we rotate around the building site south. that was the east. this is now the southeast looking up from one of the park locations across the street just south of the medical center. * rotating around to the southwest from 2 80. around to the west elevation. we're showing the freeway transparent here. freeway actually isn't. all the things below that will be hidden from view, but we know there had been discussion in the past the fact that might change. we've been equally thoughtful about the west elevation that would have a good he is theyth if i can that were to ever occur. and then at the northwest corner coming in along 16th street. and finally the northeast vantage. i kept it brief because i know you have a complete package. i wan
as a sponsor of this special district use legislation. very briefly i did want to state that the sud is contingent on the lease negotiations that the mta is conducting with the owner of 1741 powell. the negotiations are going. our requested for a continuance of one week. >> president fong: additional public comment on the two items proposed for continuance? >>: my name is richard hamlin longtime resident of north beach. i want this project very much. extraction down at the pagoda and perhaps someday having a station there. >>: -- we submitted a legal letter to the planning commission. -- opposes and objects to the extraction at the pagoda and zoning map amendment and special use district on the grounds of this project is obviously very different from the original project that was approved in the eir by example the geotechnical engineers letter included in the package points out the very high water table and the de-watering and pressure on adjacent buildings not evaluated on a previous eir. also,-- >>: this public comment is only to the continuance itself. >>: should i make comment
which i think were never used before in a manner that they were brought forward here and commissioner sugaya is the expert on that. it was a great really joyous moment to see this project come together as quickly as it did, so as many people think that can't do in san francisco, nothing can be delivered, this is proof of an extremely complicated project if you get the list of who indeed helped bring it about from the federal government, veteran's administration and on and on, i think we can all be proud of this project. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah, i know there is legislation that's being introduced by supervisor farrow regarding condo conversions and as you know, there are many people who are already in tenants and commons situations often grouped with people they may not be really linked to and they are co-owners until such time an ownership situation is used, these will become individualized, i think has a lot of promise, but me *f my question is is this going to come before us for some kind of discussion in the future? >> commissioner, i believe that legislation was already
it is been in existence, so therefore it is a non-conforming use in terms of being able to load it and unload in that area. they do have a customer dock in the front in the parking lot. the environmental review for this project stated, or it is exempt from the environmental review and there is not a traffic study or any requirement for that. as far as fire and loading, we have not checked that, and that is something that is reviewed after the approval of the conditional use. >> i am going to oppose the continuance, we have the legislation that we are responsible for and we will not always, if we are not willing to up hold in this case, then i fear, i know that one case is not supposed to set a precedent, but it will. i don't think that it is going to do something, although the orchard will talk to people merchants will say that it is not going to effect me and it is okay if i come in there and i can buy something cheaper. as far as the other issues, like loading, if we do pass it, we can take it up in, you know, just deal with it. >> commissioner antonini. >> i don't know if we are supposed t
that the project, it's a community center with a combination of 40 units with emancipated foster use and other youth that were in the system, so it's a great project and i hope they are successful because they still have legal battles that they are dealing with in the courts as well. >> thank you. commissioner sugaya? >> thank you, following up on commissioner moore's comment on veteran's commons, for those of you that don't know, the address is 150 o -- odus which is where the back of the planning department is located. it did use a combination of federal tax credits, both low-income tax credits and historic preservation tax credits which commissioner moore mentioned, historic preservation tax credits are worth as tax credits, not as a deduction as a straight credit, 25% of the rehabilitation costs of the project, so it's a substantial amount coming back to -- well, i can't say developer because they're non-profit organizations but in the case where they're non-profits, it can be syndicated, i think in this case, it's maybe bank of america, i can't remember, so wells provided some other fina
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 70 (some duplicates have been removed)